Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Seminole County v. Osborne

Seminole County v. Osborne

876 So. 2d 737, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 10466, 2004 WL 1562200
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJuly 14, 2004
DocketNo. 1D03-2569
StatusPublished

This text of 876 So. 2d 737 (Seminole County v. Osborne) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Seminole County v. Osborne, 876 So. 2d 737, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 10466, 2004 WL 1562200 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this workers’ compensation case, we reverse the award of an EEG, biofeedback, a repeat EMG/nerve conduction study and a bone scan because the managed care grievance procedure had not been exhausted and, therefore, the judge of compensation claims lacked jurisdiction to consider the claim for those treatment modalities. See Castro v. AT & T Wireless Servs., Inc., 780 So.2d 917 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). In all other respects, the order is affirmed.

AFFIRMED IN PART and REVERSED IN PART.

BOOTH, WEBSTER and DAVIS, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Castro v. AT & T WIRELESS SERVICES, INC.
780 So. 2d 917 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
876 So. 2d 737, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 10466, 2004 WL 1562200, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/seminole-county-v-osborne-fladistctapp-2004.